My wife is so fat that she is immobile
scrambledegg wrote
And your myspace says you're single.....hmmmmm
And your myspace says you're single.....hmmmmm
Ah, trolls. Gotta love em...oh wait, no you don't
14 years
Big / supersize difference
RubyRipples wrote
There have been lots of threads on this issue, there was one quite recently actually. If you search around you might find some info. As this isnt exactly a "science" there are no official numbers. It's also difficult because a woman of 6 foot tall for example, wouldnt be ssbbw at 360lbs, but a woman of 5' 4" would be. There have been "rules" that say that over 350 is ssbbw, and others that say over 400lbs. There is another that says over US size 28 (ladies) is supersize. Again though, none of these really fit due to differences in height, body frame, etc. For myself, I am 5' 3" tall, and I would say that I crossed from bbw to ssbbw around 320lbs, and US ladies clothing size 26 or so.
For ease of "classification" ( ) I've always thought that the rule of thumb should be when the biggest part of your body around (be it belly, hips or whatever) measures more than your height, you are supersized! e.. I am 5'3" tall and when I sit down and measure around my fattest part (belly) I am 6' 3". This would also solve the "problem" of extreme pear shaped women who are about a size 12 from the waist up, but can be size 30 on the bottom half.
Of course I do understand about people not liking "labels", being slotted into boxes etc, but ... life is that way for many things and its just easy.
Aussie_Bloke wrote
Ok guys, so I've had this question burning in the back of my mind for a while now, and I don't know if it's ever been discussed on the forums here before, nor would I even know how it would be answered. We all know that SSBBW's are bigger than BBW's and the same applies for BHM's
My question is: at what point does being big cross over into being supersize? is it by weight? is it by clothing size? is it by BMI? or is it by something else, and if it is by any of what I mentioned above, would be be say (hypothetically) 350lbs (150kg), or size 26 clothing or a BMI of 45 or 50. That's just an assumption.
Correct me if I'm wrong here. I just don't know of anything that defines theses particular categories
Ok guys, so I've had this question burning in the back of my mind for a while now, and I don't know if it's ever been discussed on the forums here before, nor would I even know how it would be answered. We all know that SSBBW's are bigger than BBW's and the same applies for BHM's
My question is: at what point does being big cross over into being supersize? is it by weight? is it by clothing size? is it by BMI? or is it by something else, and if it is by any of what I mentioned above, would be be say (hypothetically) 350lbs (150kg), or size 26 clothing or a BMI of 45 or 50. That's just an assumption.
Correct me if I'm wrong here. I just don't know of anything that defines theses particular categories
There have been lots of threads on this issue, there was one quite recently actually. If you search around you might find some info. As this isnt exactly a "science" there are no official numbers. It's also difficult because a woman of 6 foot tall for example, wouldnt be ssbbw at 360lbs, but a woman of 5' 4" would be. There have been "rules" that say that over 350 is ssbbw, and others that say over 400lbs. There is another that says over US size 28 (ladies) is supersize. Again though, none of these really fit due to differences in height, body frame, etc. For myself, I am 5' 3" tall, and I would say that I crossed from bbw to ssbbw around 320lbs, and US ladies clothing size 26 or so.
For ease of "classification" (
) I've always thought that the rule of thumb should be when the biggest part of your body around (be it belly, hips or whatever) measures more than your height, you are supersized! e.. I am 5'3" tall and when I sit down and measure around my fattest part (belly) I am 6' 3". This would also solve the "problem" of extreme pear shaped women who are about a size 12 from the waist up, but can be size 30 on the bottom half. Of course I do understand about people not liking "labels", being slotted into boxes etc, but ... life is that way for many things and its just easy.
LOL by your definition I was never "super-sized", at my heaviest my waist was only 64-65" and I'm about 72" tall
14 years
Who wets your whistle?
bbwildrose wrote
well that's just tough titties honey
Maximum wrote
But what if they don't respond? Then its like, super embarassing! :O
bbwildrose wrote
i've never seen the point of these threads - if you like someone, message them! don't wait to see if you're mentioned on their list first! it's all a bit juvenile really
i've never seen the point of these threads - if you like someone, message them! don't wait to see if you're mentioned on their list first! it's all a bit juvenile really
But what if they don't respond? Then its like, super embarassing! :O
well that's just tough titties honey
My gawd!! Those are the worst kind!!! *shudders in a corner due to the horror of tough titties*
14 years
